Gaming still sux on Macs

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by jadam, Jan 28, 2002.

  1. jadam macrumors 6502a

    jadam

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    #1
    Gaming on the new macs still suk, considering the fact that with a geforce 4 MX, the new powermacs get 115fps at 1024x768 with 1.5gb SDRAM, thats horrible, PeeCees get 205fps at 1024x768 with Geforce 3ees, come on, most likely tho, its whoever ported the QIII engines fualt. ohh well. Hopefully more games come out for Macs, im still ganna wait for the G5s

    Though, this is a move towards the right direction for macs, hopefully game makers will take full advantage of these new macs, I hope Doom 3 comes for macs first, then 2 months later for peecees, That would bring over dozens of gamers to the macs, and gamers are like 30% of the people who use PCs

    Kudos to Apple!
     
  2. sparkleytone macrumors 68020

    sparkleytone

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    #2
    115fps in what? or just a random 115fps, no game specified :p

    if you say quake3 you get shot because that benchmark was outdated a good solid year ago.
     
  3. jadam thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jadam

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    #3
    yeah Quake 3, but thats what apple used, maybe they should try return to the castle
     
  4. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #4
    Backtothemac

    Hate to say it, but run unreal tourn. or quake on a Mac with an LCD and look at it on an LCD based PC. The PC sucks! Believe me, the GForce 4 will rock.
     
  5. Choppaface macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Location:
    SFBA
    #5
    i don't get why people benchmark using framerates. the human eye can't tell anything above 30/sec or so anyways. so you're basically getting 100 more frames you can't see...or at least have very little movement in them :D
    although the game <i>selection</i> for macs is still pretty limited....

    check out this comparison
    http://barefeats.com/pentium4.html

    I'd like to see more app comparisons, but you can see that the G4s keep up pretty well. and in the cases that they don't, the difference still is pretty small if you look at your watch. nothing that would make you go postal and throw a brick in your monitor because you had to wait too long
     
  6. kungfu macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2002
    #6
  7. DannyZR2 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Texas
    #7
    the point

    The point is that this high frame rate of 115+ is a maximum count. When there is more going on in the screen during the game the count drops and that is why you need a cushion of those extra frames. so when it drops it will always be above what you can actually see.
     
  8. sparkleytone macrumors 68020

    sparkleytone

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    #8
    you are stupid.
     
  9. DavidCL23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    Location:
    NJ
    #9
    sparkleytone, is that how you respond when something doesn't go your way? Macs are very underpowered in comparison to pcs for games, and unless people like you realize this and admit to it, apple won't do anythng about it!!! So grow up and admit macs are not gaming machines.
     
  10. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #10
    ummmm.....too much beer

    hey.. would DDR ram help any with games?

    oh yeah, whats good about ddr ram



    dr. stupid and chemical x
     
  11. kungfu macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2002
    #11
    why am i stupid? just because you're wrong and you cant back up what you say?

    and by the way, in no way am i putting down macs (if thats what you're angry about), i still love them :p ! im just pointing something out.
     
  12. DavidCL23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    Location:
    NJ
    #12
    You can put down macs if you want, no-one says they are perfect, all we say is that they are better then pcs, and that is becoming more and more questionable as time passes.
     
  13. jadam thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jadam

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    #13
    Re: ummmm.....too much beer

    DDR does help with higher resolutions and higher color bit depths.

    Hmm im wondering now which chipset the apple Geforce 4 MX uses, if it has the 250mhz one with the 275mhz memory, that would kick serious ass, hopefully there not using the one with 200mhz and 166mhz memory, that would really suck ass, i mean realllyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy suck ass...
     
  14. Tandy Rules macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    Location:
    Florida
    #14
    Why mac sucks for games

    IBM computer are the only computers made for gaming. Look at it this way. Blizzard is the only company that creats games for that kick butt, and then converts them to OS format. Why go through the trouble of waiting 6months for a game that is already out for the PC. Or lets look at it this way, your buddy who has a PC just got this awesome game... "TOTALLY AWESOME GAME ONLY FOR PC". You want to play it, so either you get smart and buy a PC or you imulate it ( YEAH! resource hog!).

    I see mac just as a waste of money, wow! it has colored plastic..., I hear people b!tching about how they can't play a game cause it is only for PC. Well see their is a resion for that, most of the game is writen to the kernal that the IMB computer works with, a mac of the other hand, doesnt have these code. So you imulate, slow down your system, and cant even render the graphics correctly.

    If you want a kicka§§ word processor get a mac, if you want to play games, get an IBM. Also to note, if you are smart enough to build a PC you can run two hard drives, one with old Bill's Windows and then the other with Steves OSX... its just a menu change in the POST BIOS. I've done it, OS reminds me of KDE just stupid with the menu's at he top.

    GO ON FLAME ME!

    -=TANDY 1000=-
     
  15. jadam thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jadam

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    #15
    OSX on an intel processor, what kind of crack are you smoking.

    PPC and x86 chips are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, its like putting a Dreamcast game into a playstation, ARE YOU STUPID OR SOMETHING, YOU ARE A COMPLETE RETARD. Yes there is a build for x86 machines, but know one owns it, that is unless you work for apple, and you wouldnt be ****ting on macs if you worked for them you ****.
     
  16. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #16
    Re: Why mac sucks for games

    Don't flame you?!?!?!?!??? When you have great gaping holes in your logic??? I don't think so. First of all.. IBM should not be named as the 'computer are the only computer made for gaming.' utter BS. Blizzard is NOT the only company making games for the Mac (check your facts bonehead).

    I have played UT on my 500MHz TiBook against other pc's on a network, and have more then kept up with them.

    You are about to get into a world of hurt with your comments... since you are OBVIOSLY a peecee user only, and NOT open minded. I have two mac's and a pc (built myself. but could probably could have picked up one of the new 933MHz G4's with what I have dumped into it).

    My G4 500 tower, with a 32MB ATI Radeon DDR video card kicks a$$. I have been thinking about getting Giant Citizen Kabuto for it (you know the one). UT runs sweet on it, especially with the ViewSonic VG175 monitor attached.

    Have you EVER used a Mac??? How about one running OS X (10.1.2)?? I seriously doubt it. There is a real reason why the tandy computers are referred to as 'trash'

    How many pc's are still in service after 10 years, or longer??? Very few if any. I personally know people that have Mac SE systems that are still being used (daily as computers not door stops). How many peecees from that far back are still around and being used daily?? I would estimate high at one or two. The hardware from Apple is held to a higher standard then for the peecee world, that is a fact.
     
  17. Durandal7 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2001
    #17
    Let me explain something to you Tandy Rules, OS X does NOT run on an x86 chip. The basic Darwin core will run on x86 but NOT the MacOS. You clearly do not grasp what a processor is or how it works. Just because you threw in some crap about BIOS does not mean it will confuse us into believing you. Maybe you just used an emulator and hit your head.
     
  18. jadam thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jadam

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    #18
    seriously, i think this guy is a complete ****ing idiot, i mean running OSX on and intel machine, heh, that would be soooooooooooo slow, because of the fact you have a 500mhz Pee cee, 1ghz Peecee, 2ghz Peecee, 1.5 ghz peecee, 750mhz peecee, an Athlon, Duron, Celeron, Pentuim 4, Celeron, PIII-M, Athlon 4, Transmeta Crusoe, my god, the list goeas on and on, on macs u got a G3, or G4 thats it.

    Then again this kid once told me that it would be a piece of cake to install Windows 2k on a PS2, heh, how stupid is that, he does i dont know... how much **** in my school involving computers, i do what in my school, nothinggggggg. and im at least 10x smarter than this kid, Dumb people get to good places i mean look at microsoft. and dell, and Gateway, have you seen their new Ads, a talking Cow, HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA,

    now there trying to compete with apple with a 2.2ghz P4, 1gb RDRAM, DVD-R, Geforce 3(though a Radeon 8500 DV would be the proper choice) look at them try to compete...

    Stupid people
     
  19. Tandy Rules macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    Location:
    Florida
    #19
    Re: Re: Why mac sucks for games

    "There is a real reason why the tandy computers are referred to as 'trash'" um... dude, do you even know what a tandy computer or on.... a Tandy 1000 is. Its a TERMINAL, a loading station for software from the mid '80's .... were you even born then?

    Actually I have used a while range of Operating Systems and CPU's. From PC, Linux, Unix, Mac, and Sun. As well as the CPU's, from Intel and AMD to the POWER4 and Alpha. Wow worked with an Alpha oh and the POWER4.... WOW! How many of you even know what that is.

    For the amount you guys pay for a Mac you could build an IBM, that is faster... no not the MHz rating... the ACTUAL CALCULATIONS PER CYCLE. If any one Flames me about the Clock rate I am in full right to call you an idiot! As well as DDR, ATA133 HDD, and You can even get a the new nVidia nForce.... even though it is a GrForce2 its still able to beet a GeForce3 or 4. With all of this and a nice LCD or CRT monitor.... you'll still be saving at lest a grand or two.

    For the mac.... word processor with bells and some other stuff. Dont even say the mac is perfict, just about everytime I get on mine it locks up, with its own software! Yes, windows 9x sucks... but XP has yet to lock up. The same with Linux and either of the two major shells, and sun, if it locks up or crashes... something is wrong with it, cause they are made not to.

    If you want to play games, play it on a PC with Bills software... the hardware it was designed to run on.
     
  20. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #20
    The Radeon 8500 is coming to the Mac, in AGP form (see ATI's web site). On the peecee side, it is a sweet card. I fully expect that it would perform just as good in a G4/G5 if not better.

    I say better because, as so nicely put above, you only have one or two processors to deal with, and not tons. I am not sure if the 8500 will work in a 2x AGP slot, or if it requires a 4x slot. If it works in the 2x then it should be good for all G4's. You also have less variables with the motherboards and everything else.
     
  21. anshelm macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2002
    #21
    " If you want a kicka§§ word processor get a mac, if you want to play games, get an IBM. Also to note, if you are smart enough to build a PC you can run two hard drives, one with old Bill's Windows and then the other with Steves OSX... its just a menu change in the POST BIOS. I've done it, OS reminds me of KDE just stupid with the menu's at he top."

    It is physically impossible to run OS X on a PC. MacOS X is compiled for the PowerPC processor. The Assembly language that the PPC understands is RADICALLY different then the Assembly language an x86 processor understands.

    Um, dude, that's NOT how you dual-boot. I dual boot every day. And let me splain it to you: it has nothing to do with the BIOS. It's not a "menu change". It's a program that sits in the master boot sector of your hard disk called a boot loader, and that allows you to choose which OS to run. Your BIOS doesn't know anything about OS's.

    And KDE is nothing like MacOS X. Just because you know a *nix window manager's name doesn't mean you know what it looks like. You want to know what KDE looks like? I'll take a screenshot and send it to you. It looks a LOT more like Windows then MacOS X.

    Also, do you even KNOW what the you're talking about? There is no such thing as the "POST BIOS". POST means Power On Self Test. It's what the computer does when it gets powered on. It tests to check and see if the components are working. The BIOS stands for Basic Input Output System. It's what actually talks directly to the hardware. There IS no such thing as the "POST BIOS".

    Also, you don't need two hard drives to dual boot. You can dual boot off of one hard drive just fine. The boot loader doesn't care if both OS's are on the same drive or on multiple drives. There are actually FOUR bootable partitions before the extended partition, Windows is just stupid enough to only recognize one bootable partition.

    So, how did you overcome the fact that PPC Assembly language is foreign to x86 processors, the fact that there is no such thing as the "POST BIOS", and also that there is no "menu change" to select which OS to run?
     
  22. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #22
    Re: Re: Re: Why mac sucks for games

    ok Bubba... first off, the trash system is what the TRS-80 was referred to (trash 80) were you around back then???

    No computer is perfect... especially peecee's, and don't even start on xp with it's security holes out the whazoo. I could go out tomorrow and pop in an ATA133 card into my G4 tower and use any hard drive I want. The ONLY item that is not for the Mac YET is DDR memory, and I expect that will be soon.

    Did you ever think that since you hate the Mac sooo much that you are the one locking it up?? When was the last time you bothered to either update it or run utilities on it?? I don't mean the crappy ones that come with peecee's (which BLOW!!).

    Old Billy-Bob gates rapes you for his software.. who wants to pay upwards of $300+ for an OS??? I won't, plain and simple. Consider, I purchased the OS X 10.1 retail box for about $130 and that came with BOTH 9.2.1 AND 10.1.

    Since you are obviouly a peecee lover and Mac hater, go bugger yourself and leave us alone.
     
  23. Catfish_Man macrumors 68030

    Catfish_Man

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2001
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #23
    Sloooooow down people...

    ...you're all getting a bit hyper. Here's some facts:

    1) Quake III benchmarks depend on the settings. Using the right settings a DP 800 can get 250 fps on QIII. A DP1Ghz would do MUCH better. A 2.2GHz P4 would probably do even better, unless QIII uses Altivec a lot.

    2) Windows will not run on a Mac without an emulator, the reverse is also true.

    3) The Power4 is awesome

    4) The GeForce 4 is also awesome, and it came out for Mac first (same as the GeForce 3). (I still like the Radeon 8500 better. TruForm is *awesome*)

    5) Not only is Blizzard not the only company making Mac games, there are SEVERAL companies making Mac ONLY games. You just can't run them on a PC.

    6) Macs are not word processors. They're graphics machines.

    7) Apple needs to put DDR ram on Macs. SDRAM is crippling their performance. A DP 1GHz with DDR would flatten a 2.2GHz P4. (the P4 gets less done per clock cycle, but the Mac has SMP overhead, so they pretty much cancel out. However, the Mac still has Altivec.)

    8) This is just a maintenance update. Otherwise they would have hyped it more. The G5 is coming...
     
  24. jadam thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jadam

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    #24
    BTW, Windows XP BLOWZ, Ive been helping my uncle fix up his Peecee, first of all, his first motherboard burned with his geforce 2 MX, he then bought a new video card geforce 3 ti 200 a new motherboard, We installed a pirated version of Windowz XP pro, we had frequent lock ups, we then got a new motherboard, guess what lock ups again... We then went out and BOUGHT windowz XP home edition, hmm, what a pain, STILL we had lock ups, not until 3 days later did we find out it was the USB ports on our mother board that was messing it up. my god the time lost. Now we cant even use USB, great...

    On a mac that wouldnt happen because their are no jumpers to **** up your computer with. Windowz blowz, its a waist of money. thats why winblowz. I just hope Apple vastly improves opengl performance in OS X.2

    WINDOWS SUCKS, my 233mhz Pentuim laptop which im using now, until G5 comes out, I took off Windowz 98 and installed BeOS, guess what the OS is dead, but its about 100x more stable and faster, not once has beos crashed on me, windows every day... and since macs are based on Unix, they kick aSSSSSSSSSSS
     
  25. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #25
    That is typical of what I have heard about xp...

    I have been running OS X 10.x on my TiBook since it came out. I went out and bought 10.1 and have NEVER had a crash/freeze/lockup in my computer.

    It has been well over 6 months since I first installed OS X (don't remember when I installed 10.0.4 but it was within a month of it's release).

    Apple make computers a joy to use.
     

Share This Page